Umno ready for the battlefield

Tweet

Ready for the battlefield

Insight By Joceline Tan,

Umno admits the next general election will be its most challenging but it has signalled that last weekend’s party general assembly will not be its last as the ruling party.

THE cannons were all pointed outwards. This was glaringly evident at the Umno general assembly this year. The guns had started shooting when the Wanita, Pemuda and Puteri wings began their own assemblies on Wednesday.

“This is a war drum assembly. The ground is tough but we are upbeat,” said Putrajaya Umno Youth chief Datuk Zaki Zahid.

Everyone was conscious that the enemy is outside the party and that they were about to face the most critical general election in the party’s history. It has sunk in that this could be their last general assembly as a ruling party and it is a scary thought for them.

Guns blazing: Umno’s last general assembly before the mother of all battles saw delegates pointing their cannons outwards at their opponents. — The Star / AZAHAR MAHFOF

Their sights are on the general election. They did not want to end up scoring their own goals, as deputy president Tan Sri Muhyiddin said when winding up. It explained why the atmosphere at Dewan Merdeka was so different.

As such, while the media corps gave the thumbs-up to the revamped media centre this year, they found the proceedings rather tame and decorous. Journalists who are used to the flowery and bombastic rhetoric, the chest-thumping and jokes that are so much a part of Umno assemblies, found the proceedings somewhat too tame and serious.

The debates had to reflect their intent to hold on to power, and their habit of telling jokes and praising their leaders sky-high had to be put on hold.

They did not want to say anything that could damage the party’s image as what happened in 2005 when their jingoistic tone of debate shocked the nation. The stakes are high for Umno, and as party president Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said, there is no such thing as second place in an election.

 

Shahrizat: The tigress in her came out.

The Malays call it “jaga mulut” (holding one’s tongue). But some claimed it also reflects the new awareness in Umno. They cannot simply say what they like in the new political landscape and hope to get away with it as what happened to Perak DAP leader Nga Kor Ming whose racist slur against Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir is still playing out on the Internet.

The guns were aimed mainly at PKR and DAP whereas, PAS, some noted, got off rather lightly. There was not a single reference to the sex video or the sodomy trial, but numerous speakers poked fun at the “parti sekeluarga” or party of one family, where the husband is the de facto leader, the wife is the president and their daughter is the vice-president.

PKR deputy president Azmin Ali’s bravado about breaking down the prison walls if Anwar goes to jail was a favourite topic among speakers. They slammed him for challenging the law, the cheekier ones referred to him as the “buah hati” (beloved), alluding to the preferential treatment he gets from Anwar.



They also hit hard at DAP. They were fed up with DAP blaming Umno for everything under the sky. As one of them pointed out, Umno was blamed even when stray dogs disrupted the Penang Hill train service in Penang last year. PAS was painted as being under the thumb of DAP to the point of putting aside their religious aspirations.

Umno, said Pasir Salak Umno politician Dr Faizal Abdullah, has been slow to react in the past.

“We are going to tackle every issue thrown at us. You can already see that from the speakers,” he said.

Zaki: ‘The ground is tough but we are upbeat’

Some were quite hilarious when hitting back. For instance, a Wanita Umno speaker said it was absurd of former Perak Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin to claim that Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil owned a RM26,000 bra. The speaker had people collapsing in laughter when she suggested that he either had see-through vision or a secret crush on the Wanita Umno chief.

The endless references to winnable candidates shows that the idea has perolated into the party psyche. Now comes the hard part of telling those who are no longer winnable to make way.

That will be Najib’s headache and he had better have lots of Panadol on standby.

Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin, a more mature and measured person today than when he rode in on a wave of controversy three years ago, put it well when he said that a winnable candidate is one thing, but he or she can only do well with the backing of the party. But, as he noted, Umno has a winnable president.

Former Terengganu Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Idris Jusoh and former Umno secretary-general Datuk Seri Radzi Sheikh Ahmad made it a little easier for the Umno president when they said on the sidelines of the assembly that they would make way for new faces in the election.

More may follow in the months ahead but as some pointed out, the problem is less about old faces finding it hard to let go than about aspiring candidates sabotaging each other if they are not picked.

New landscape

Najib’s remark about “orang Umno” or party loyalists or stalwarts reminded them that being an Umno member is more than just carrying a membership card, it’s about going the extra mile for the party.

 
Khairy: ‘Umno has a winnable president’

Umno and the Barisan Nasional will have to rely in a big way on the Malay vote to survive the general election.

“People will hear what they want to hear from the president’s speech. His message that we have to adapt to the new landscape, lead in the new media, talk the language of the youth – we can relate to what he is saying,” said Zaki.

Moreover, internal Umno surveys show that more than 60% of young voters are still undecided.

“If we want to tackle this group of voters, we cannot behave like we are still living in the 1980s or 1990s,” said Dr Faizal.

People are still talking about the way Shahrizat fired up the Wanita Umno assembly with her fierce opening speech. This was a new side to the usually decorous politician who is fighting off criticism over her family’s RM250mil cattle rearing project. She is furious about the way the Pakatan politicians have gone for her.

She was like a tigress. Her eyes, dramatised by dark eyeliner, blazed as she went for the jugular of her critics in PKR. The ladies loved the way she turned the tables on PKR president Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail and her husband Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. She was basically saying: “Don’t mess with me.”

But Umno’s top lady is not in a good place now even though there is no doubt about her support from the senior ladies. Some in Umno wondered whether the message was also aimed at those within the party. Was she also telling critics in the party not to push her around, that the 1.3 million Wanita members could shake up the party if the ladies rebelled?

No one could quite read her at this point in time. Neither could anyone tell where she is heading from here. The National Feedlot Corporation (NFC) issue has hurt her and the collateral impact on the party is still reverberating.

Despite their support for her, the Wanita ladies are quite uncomfortable with Shahrizat’s claim that Pakatan politicians were attacking her because she is the Wanita leader. They are concerned about Wanita Umno being dragged into a controversy that has nothing to do with the wing.

The controversy was evidently off-limits at the general assembly. She would have felt the heat from the men if not for a looming general election.

The weird thing is that while there was hardly a mention of controversy inside the assembly, it was a top topic outside the Dewan Merdeka. Opinion in the party about the issue is quite negative. Privately, many say she should make a decision about the situation rather than leave it to the president.

Shahrizat has reached a critical junction in her career. She will have to think about whether she is still a winnable candidate and she may have to decide very soon before the issue escalates and pulls more people in or, worse, pulls the party down.

Umno’s last assembly before the polls settled a number of questions surrounding the leadership. It is quite clear by now that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is firmly behind Najib and wants Najib to win well and for Umno to survive. He is true-blue “orang Umno”. And so is Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. The two Tuns are not on the best of terms but they are on the same page in their support for Najib and Umno.

Najib also made it crystal clear that he appreciates Muhyiddin whom he described as a loyal Deputy Prime Minister. He is aware of the gossip out there that he and Muhyiddin have different ideas about Umno’s direction. The No. 1 and No. 2 are two different personalities but they are “orang Umno”.

When Najib took over Umno 30 months ago, the party was floundering, battered black and blue. As Najib rallied the troops at the end of the assembly, everyone could see that this man had taken their party back on the track. He has set them in a state of preparedness for the polls. That was the aim of this year’s assembly.

Very few had seen Najib as an orator but every year, his off-the-cuff speeches in Umno get better. He made a striking figure in his fuschia pink baju Melayu. Confident, earnest and focused, he spoke like a man who knows he has pulled off a job that very few people could and he has done it to the best of his ability.

He is on top of the game and unfazed by the politics of the day. Most importantly, he knows his party is behind him. Despite having somewhat of a poker face, Najib showed a humorous side as he playfully mocked his opponents. The Malays call it “perli” and the audience loved it.

The feedback coming in from the Malay ground has actually been very positive for Umno but the party leader does not want his members to take it easy, thinking they are going to make it. He wants them to stay alert, hungry for power and work hard to win.

His message at the assembly was not only for those inside PWTC but as Umno’s best brand name, he is also telling those outside the party to put their trust in him and in Umno to lead the Barisan Nasional.

Umno, he is saying, is ready for Battlefield Putrajaya.

How Malaysia's politics stay true while reinventing?

Tweet

Much ado about everything

Behind The Headlines By Bunn Nagara

MALAYSIA has braved slogans as milestones with chequered results.

Spanning two decades were the Mahathir-era “Vision 2020” and its “Bangsa Malaysia” component, and the Najib administration’s “1Malaysia” and “high-income nation”. As national goals, they have been positive, inclusive and aspirational.

In 1997 then deputy premier Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim proposed masyarakat madani, translated as but supposedly transcending “civil society”. Much of its potential was however obscured by interpretation issues even in the original Bahasa Malaysia.

Malaysians are generally wary of attempts to tinker with the existing secular (non-theocratic) system. So in the 1999 general election, much of the DAP’s support evaporated over its links with PAS in the Barisan Alternatif opposition pact.

In 2001, then prime minister Datuk Seri (now Tun) Dr Mahathir Mohamad said Malaysia was an “Islamic state”. This infamous statement panicked some political circles, notably the DAP.

Typical of Dr Mahathir’s rhetorical flourishes, it was meant to counter and challenge, and needed to be read in context. It had come after a wearying tussle between PAS, which had sought to install an Islamic state and amend the Federal Constitution, and its adversaries.



Dr Mahathir later said since (as he had defined it) Malaysia was already an Islamic state, there was no need to amend the Constitution. He had sought to end the debate and preserve the secular status quo rather than to change it.

That was fine as long as Dr Mahathir still headed the Federal Government and dominated the terms of the national debate. Nine months later he went further and declared Malaysia a “fundamentalist Islamic state”, according to his (textually correct) definition of fundamentalism.

But after he retired in 2003, the terms of the debate changed and his past statements encouraged PAS in further Islamisation instead. His successor Datuk Seri (now Tun) Abdullah Ahmad Badawi could not direct or dominate the discourse that followed.

Aware of popular opposition to its theocratic aims, PAS this year unveiled the idea of a “welfare state”, a vague concept that did not impress many. Kelantan Mentri Besar and PAS spiritual adviser Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat then announced plans to implement hudud in his state.

Some legal quarters insisted that no state may implement hudud (punishments for “serious crimes”) without amending the Federal Constitution, but that view has been challenged. PAS then said hudud would not apply to non-Muslims, but that has also been questioned.

Hudud is part of syariah law along with qiya (punitive recompense), diyya (compensatory settlement) and tazir (corporal punishment). Hudud covers apostasy, alcohol consumption, theft (or robbery) and illicit sex, with punishments that include amputation and execution.

These offences can involve other people, including those serving or selling the alcohol or those accused of trying to convert Muslims. Thus saying that hudud would apply only to Muslims is unconvincing.

Further, hudud is considered divinely inspired so its punishments are not open to reform, substitution or reduction. PAS has also told non-Muslims that since hudud would not involve them, they have no right to object.

But in July 2002 after the PAS Terengganu government passed the Hudud and Qisas Bill, Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Hadi Awang said hudud would be “extended to all non-Muslims” when they were ready for it. Presumably the party would decide when non-Muslims are “ready”.

Parti Keadilan Nasional at the time had joined protests against the Bill’s impending passage. But this year, PKR adviser Anwar supported Kelantan’s plan to implement hudud.

Beyond DAP chairman Karpal Singh’s personal objections, the party does not oppose Kelantan’s plans for hudud. DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng said hudud was not mentioned in Pakatan Rakyat’s Common Policy Framework (Buku Jingga), placing any opposition to it only at Federal level.

But once Kelantan introduces hudud, Kedah as another Pakatan state may follow. Then, acquiescing at state level may be taken as tacit approval for compliance at Federal level.

These and related issues would be explored at today’s Insap (Institute of Strategic Analysis and Policy Research) forum at Wisma MCA in Kuala Lumpur from 9.30am to 2.30pm. Admission is free.

China says it can’t use forex reserves to save Europe

Tweet

BEIJING: Europe cannot expect China to use a big portion of its US$3.2 trillion foreign exchange reserves to rescue indebted nations, a top Chinese foreign ministry official said, Beijing's strongest rebuttal yet to suggestions it should bail out the eurozone.

Vice-Foreign Minister Fu Ying said at a forum the argument that China should rescue Europe did not stand and that Europeans might have misunderstood how China managed its reserves.

She did not explicitly rule out using part of China's reserves for more targeted measures, but implied China was not going to ride in with a big chunk of its “savings” and bail out crisis-stricken Europe.

“We cannot use this money domestically to alleviate poverty,” Fu said. “We also can't take this money abroad for development support.”

Economists estimate that Beijing has already invested a fifth of its reserves in euro assets.

While the size of China's reserves is the largest in the world, analysts say two-thirds of that is locked up in dollar assets that cannot be sold, giving Beijing a more modest portion of about US$470bil to invest each year.

Fu said China's reserves were akin to the country's savings and that the 1997 Asian financial crisis taught Beijing how important reserves were to the nation.

China's foreign ministry does not exert direct influence over how the country invests its foreign exchange reserves but can comment on that policy.

Fu said Beijing's refusal to use its reserves to ease Europe's debt woes did not count as a lack of support for the region, which was also China's biggest export market.

“I say the idea that China should save Europe does not stand. What I mean is the money cannot be used this way,” Fu said. “China has never been absent from any international efforts to help Europe. We have always been an active participant, and a healthy particpant as well.”

As the owner of the world's largest foreign exchange reserves, China is one of the few governments with pockets deep enough to buy a sizeable portion of European government debt and help pull the region from its economic malaise. - Reuters

China says it can't use forex reserves to rescue Europe

02-Dec-11, 8:41 PM | Agence France Presse

BEIJING - China's vice foreign minister on Friday ruled out using the nation's vast foreign exchange reserves to bail out Europe, as the debt-laden continent tries to stave off the risk of a massive default.

"The argument that China should rescue Europe does not stand," vice foreign minister Fu Ying told an EU-China forum.

"We cannot use foreign reserves for... rescuing foreign countries. We need to ensure safety, liquidity and profit for the foreign reserves."

European leaders have lobbied China, the world's second largest economy, to help struggling eurozone countries by contributing to a bailout fund, but so far Beijing has not made a firm commitment.

The Asian powerhouse, which has the world's largest foreign exchange reserves at $3.2017 trillion, has said it is keen to seek more investment opportunities in Europe, but has held back from agreeing to contribute to the fund.

Fu pointed to China's purchase of European bonds, increased imports and expanded investment in the continent, which would "create jobs and restore growth".

But she insisted China was not seeking to use its considerable financial clout to exert power over the continent.

"China is no old-fashioned power or empire. China has no intention of seeking power through financial means," she said.

China's commerce minister Chen Deming said last month Beijing would lead an investment delegation to Europe next year, and the head of China's sovereign wealth fund has said it is keen to invest in European infrastructure.

But some in Europe have expressed concern about the potential cost of accepting Beijing's help.

In October, Francois Hollande, the Socialist candidate for next year's French presidential elections, asked if China was really "riding to the rescue of the euro... without making any demands in return?"

Fu also reiterated China's confidence in Europe, just as European leaders prepare to meet at a summit next week that some have billed as their last chance to restore the credibility of eurozone economic governance.

"We have reason to believe that Europe has the wisdom, capacity and resources to make it this time by accelerating adjustment and reform," she said.

Related post:

Is China still a developing nation? 

Understanding our rights

Tweet

Brave New World By AZMI SHAROM

Rights are not something to be played with. It is not a political tool to be bandied about. It is fundamental and inherent. It exists in us simply because we are civilised men and women. 

RIGHTS are the weapons of the powerless. And just who are the powerless? Well, in my view, it is most of us.

Ordinary folks who either do not hold the reins of government machinery or have the means to control those who hold the reins.

That is why only those who are powerless or who have been powerless can truly appreciate rights.

We only have to look at history to see that to be true. The Magna Carta was created because the nobility of Britain felt powerless against the King.

The American Declaration of Independence takes the shape that it does because the founding fathers wanted to ensure that they would never again be under the yoke of a distant king.Image via Wikipedia

Our own leaders, during the early days of our existence as a nation also understood this need for rights, having been ruled by an oppressive force more powerful than them.

Of course there are those with short memories who belittle rights when they have power, bemoan the lack of them when they lose power and belittle them again when they have power once more.

But then, there will always be the utterly unprincipled in any community.



The human race has evolved. We have values which prevent the strong simply taking what they want from the weak.

Our laws are in place so that we can be assured a person who is bigger than us can’t simply knock us out and take our wallets.

And just as we have laws to protect us against thieves and thugs, so too do we have principles which prevent the rulers from abusing us.

As a race we have come a long way from “only the strong will survive”. And that is due to the civilising of human kind.

Rights therefore are the current pinnacle of this civilising process. It indicates that we are civilised.

Related to human rights is democracy. When we choose our own leaders, we ensure that we are not led simply by someone who is going to force himself or herself onto us.

Once again, we see a principle which empowers the powerless.

This is why I care so much about human rights and democracy.

This is why I get furious when those who do not understand or choose not to understand, take my rights away.

That is why I work on the premise that we must have as much rights as possible.

Of course I understand there are limitations to everything, including rights, but those limitations must be made with the aspiration that a complete right is the ideal.

It is only with these aspirations in place will we ensure that whatever limitations imposed are the barest minimum and with the smallest effect on our rights.

Rights are not something to be played with. It is not a political tool to be bandied about. It is fundamental, it is inherent. It is not something that can be given for it exists in us simply because we are civilised men and women.

The powerful do not wish to see this.

It is up to us, the powerless, to remind them.

Related post:

New thinking on human rights & cooperation 

Only Capitalists Can Save Capitalism

Tweet
Image via Wikipedia


Maggie Starvish

If capitalism was a stock, the market would appear rather bearish on its future.

Bank failures, economic crises, and middle-class riots across the globe appear symptomatic of large systemic weaknesses in the market system, highlighted by the 2008 global financial meltdown. Income inequality separating corporate leaders from their rank-and-file workers has become a hot-button issue in the upcoming presidential election. And in public opinion polls, business moguls are cushioned from the bottom of the reputation scale only by members of Congress. Fixes so far have largely eluded elected officials, government regulators, and tent city activists.

But there is one group of citizens with the power to make a difference: business leaders themselves, say Harvard Business School Professors Joseph L. Bower, Herman B. "Dutch" Leonard, and Lynn S. Paine, authors of Capitalism at Risk: Rethinking the Role of Business.

"Our book argues that if we don't begin to address, in a systemic way, the issues and problems and the negative outcomes and challenges [of market capitalism], then we are likely to see a lot more movements like Occupy Wall Street," says Leonard.

Capitalism at Risk grew out of preparations for Harvard Business School's centennial celebration in 2008. Bower, Leonard, and Paine felt it important to identify key issues that HBS should focus on going into its next 100 years, so they organized a series of forums on four continents with top business leaders, many of whom were HBS alums. "We set up the forums as opportunities for candid discussion among peers," says Paine.

The principal question asked of each participant was this: "If we stipulate that the system of market capitalism has been the source of remarkable economic growth, what are the prospects for continuing growth in the future? What aspects of the system at the level of firms, industries, nations, or multilateral institutions might cause serious difficulties?"



The principal response is summed in the book: "Market capitalism has proven to be a golden goose providing historically unimaginable economic benefits to many, and if we don't look out, we may kill it."

From prediction to fruition

Problems that forum participants cited included environmental degradation, trade breakdowns, and failure of the rule of law. Concerns over the lack of transparency into and oversight of the financial system were voiced by many. In all, 10 potential disruptors of the global market system were identified.

"One of the things we were told even before the economic crisis was that the financial system had grown to such a scale and was functioning in such a way that it was no longer necessarily lined up with the needs of the industrial system, or the way society wanted it to function," says Bower. "And lo and behold, we now have a crisis that illustrates what they were concerned about."

"If you believe that the problems ahead are likely to be very serious, and neither government nor business can address them, that doesn't leave you with many options."
—Lynn Paine

"Perhaps we should credit the participants in our forums for their prescience," notes Paine, reflecting on an e-mail she received recently from a participant on how much the world had changed since 2007. "The question now is whether we can mobilize business leadership on a sufficient scale to make a difference."

"Our view is the system could go, if companies don't step up," says Bower. "It's companies that have the skill sets necessary to go from a vision to making something a reality."

Considering the number of corporations whose annual revenue is larger than the GDP of many small countries, the proposition makes sense. The authors argue that the problems are systemic, and who better to attack huge issues than people who run small, medium, and huge organizations.

Bower, Leonard, and Paine are prepared to have their views challenged. Even some of the forum participants, says Leonard, "didn't think what we are calling for is either appropriate for or likely to come from business and business leaders." And while Leonard agrees that some of the criticisms are valid, "the alternative of having business sit this one out is too risky."

Adds Paine: "Of course we recognize that there are serious obstacles to the view we recommend," including a lack of structure, tools, and incentives within businesses to do the sort of work that's needed, and a lack of skills and incentive on the part of business leaders to operate on the global political front. "But we see those as challenges to be overcome rather than fatal flaws in the idea. If you believe that the problems ahead are likely to be very serious, and if you believe that neither government nor business can address them, that doesn't leave you with many options."

"There is clearly political content to what we are suggesting," says Bower. "We talk about the need for leaders of companies to develop skill sets that they might not have—a lot of our business leaders have not been brought up to be comfortable in dealing with politicians. So part of what we're talking about is learning how to operate in the public arena without getting into trouble. It's hard."

Addressing the problems

HBS has made significant strides in preparing students to be the kind of leaders that the book calls for, says Leonard, noting as one example the required first-year MBA course Leadership and Corporate Accountability. "Where I think we still have far to go is in teaching the skills for operating in the high-conflict, low-authority zone outside your own firm. Most of what we teach is about how to optimize within your firm, where you tend to have a high level of authority and where there is general agreement on goals.

"Where I think we still have far to go is in teaching the skills for operating in the high-conflict, low-authority zone outside your own firm."
—Dutch Leonard

"By contrast," Leonard continues, "when our book calls on business leaders to exercise leadership outside their firms, we are inviting them to operate in a domain where they have little authority and where there is great conflict over what the most important goals are. The skills to do this involve what we might call small 'p' political skills—and we don't teach nearly as much of that as we could and should, nor do we have many cases about business leaders operating in that high-conflict, low-authority domain."

Giving students a broader perspective outside the HBS classroom is another possibility, such as pairing B-school students with other Harvard students who are studying similar big problems, says Paine, who cofounded and served for five years as course head of Leadership and Corporate Accountability.

"For example, I have in mind a course that would bring together students from HBS, Harvard Law School, and the Kennedy School to explore, as board members and as leadership teams of companies, what could be done … both through innovative business strategies and through innovative institutional arrangements."

According to Paine, many HBS students share the concerns voiced in the book and aspire to the type of entrepreneurial leadership needed for reform. "It's critical that we harness the energy and ideas our students bring to these challenges, and that we as a faculty help them develop the skills and capabilities needed to practice this kind of leadership."

So even as the market system has created threats to its own sustainability, it can also reward enterprising companies of any size that can turn these problems into opportunities. The book provides examples of business efforts that promote social good without sacrificing profit: a mobile communications rollout in rural China that "extended the benefits of participating in the market system to millions of people" while increasing profits and growth at the country's largest telecommunications firm; "a boutique asset-management firm that invests in companies whose business models are aligned with the needs of a sustainable global economy."

But Capitalism at Risk leaves a lot of the heavy lifting in the hands of business leaders. "We're pretty clear that we don't have all the answers," says Bower, "but we're also pretty clear that we need action."

The form that action takes remains to be seen. But it's worth noting that while members of the "Occupy" movements may be retreating for the winter, the problems they have highlighted are likely to remain with us for some time.

About the author:Maggie Starvish is a writer based in Somerville, Massachusetts.

Related post:

We need to talk about capitalism, say CEOs